The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the grounds of appeal as to the occupational breach of trust, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the occupational breach of trust (excluding the part not guilty in the grounds of appeal) among the facts charged in the instant case on the grounds stated

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the relevant legal doctrine and the evidence duly admitted, the lower court’s aforementioned determination is justifiable. In so determining, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on intent

2. As to the grounds of appeal as to the entry of a building, the lower court, on the grounds as stated in its reasoning, found the Defendant guilty of entering the building among the facts charged of the instant case.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the evidence duly admitted by the court below, the above determination by the court below is just, and contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the court below did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of

3. According to Article 383 subparag. 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act with respect to the grounds of appeal on sentencing, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment or imprisonment without prison labor for more than ten years is imposed. Thus, in this case where the Defendant was sentenced to a minor sentence, the argument that the sentence is too unreasonable is not legitimate

4. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.